Got us by the short and curlies
 

I have to get this off my chest:

I can't believe that in this whole world, there is only ONE company that makes it possible for a Blackberry to talk to a Mac?! The reason that I am in such disbelief is because I, like others, have a new Intel Mac and therefore have absolutely no way to sync my Blackberry. This is not necessarily a rant against PocketMac, I'm sure they are dilegently working on a solution. But what if that solution doesn't come for a year? I can't sync my Blackberry for year? It's useless at that point and so is the calendar on my Mac. What if they correct the issues that they are having and then Apple updates the OS again and changes things? What if PocketMac goes out of business? Any way you slice it, we're still relying on only ONE company to provide us with this functionality.

I have to believe that there is a big enough market out there to do this that another company could get into the game (or at least, add it to their already built program. Do you hear me Missing Sync!).

Whew, I feel a little better now.

That is one of the biggest reasons I stay with Windows.....

Short and curlies?!

Maybe Mark/Space will step up?

Maybe we should all let Mark/Space know we want them to code us a sync program?

markspace.com

Yeah, short and curlies. Think about what type of hair on your body is short and curly, then imagine someone grabbing you by it. Not much you can do when they have a good grip.

That's great philton...so why are you posting in the Mac Users Corner if you're on Windows?

Download Boot Camp, load a Wnidows OS, boot into Windows, sync with desktop manager. Works like a champ!

Hmm that would suck

Exactly. Then you can use the "real" BlackBerry stuff, including using it as a modem. :)

But even w/ Bootcamp you can't sync iCal or your address book...

but for a loader, sure! hehe

That is why, although I get files in email or pictures on a CD only viewable on a Mac (I'm considering getting a Mac PowerBook or other Mac notebook for this reason), I will ALWAYS use my Windows PC to synch my BB.

Yeah I agree the situation sucks. But on Windows, the solution is provided by the device creator and only involves Microsoft and RIM. This makes it easier when it comes to development. In the case of the Mac, the market is small (I bet smaller than you think) and the task is harder much harder. The application creator needs support from Apple, Microsoft, and RIM. Each of these companies have to provide different levels of support to make it work. In the case of the RIM development portion, the creator even needs to make a OSX USB driver for the BlackBerry. Apple needs to provide API interfaces for iCal, Address Book, and who knows what else if you want to use it as a tethered modem. Microsoft needs to provide the API for Entourage. And that is just the start, the list of information is huge and then to get it all integrated and working and stay working through BlackBerry device upgrades or new BlackBerry devices. Just doesn't sound fun. Maybe if BlackBerry supported OBEX through bluetooth to allow sync this would all go away, but don't think that will ever happen.

toddz

FWIW, PocketMac connects via USB and syncs fine with Entourage, iCal and the Address Book -- on PowerPC based Macs.

The problem is (according to their website) that Apple made some last-minute changes to the Intel Mac (after PocketMac had already finished their software), so it doesn't work. They're supposed to have an updated version ready "any time", but it seems to be taking them awhile. :)

Yes, I think that all the Mac people know about PM BB working on the PowerPC Macs and those with Intel Macs they know what excuse that PocketMac (IAA) gives for the application not working. However, the original question was why nobody else enters the field of BlackBerry to Mac synchronization. I simply stated that the "entrance fee" was too difficult. I really could care less what Apple did to the API and why IAA can't compensate if they know what those changes were. Surely it isn't months worth of effort to get out a patch, unless of course Apple is withholding information.

toddz

Pay $20 per month to get Link2Exchange as your hosted BES to sync email with Mail, then use AddressX and GroupCal from SnerdWare to sync iCal and Address Book. Done.

I'm with you jon. I've been very patient up to now but its starting to piss me off too.

As for using BootCamp and Windoze.... there is a reason I have a Mac :D

It's just that with the million-and-two homebrew scripts and Cocoa apps floating around that interface with iCal/Address Book (and even Entourage), it doesn't seem like "APIs" would be much of a hurdle. :?

I agree that hosted BES is a great solution. Entourage can now sync with iCal and the Address Book and your BB syncs OTA with BES (note that the Calendar, Address Book and eMail work OTA, Notes and Todos in Entourage aren't synced with Exchange so they don't sync with yoru BB).

The only problem is installing apps - many are available OTA but the one's I want aren't!

Dual booting is not an option. What purpose is booting to an operating system just for the sake of syncing? Then I would have to do all of my emailing, calendaring, and tasking on that OS is well. At that point I mine as well just use Windows.

Toddz, I completely understand what you are saying, but have to side with aristobrat: there are tons of other softwares that interact with these programs and they don't have a problem getting the necessary API's. I don't know much about it, but I don't think that Apple restricts its APIs (I think they are available at their developers site). That being said, there must be some reason why it's not happening and it could be, as you said, related to the fact that the market is smaller than I think.

I know that if I were on a BES, this wouldn't be an issue, but I'm not and nor do I want to be. I perfectly happy with my BIS setup and feel it's unecessary to pay extra money for a functionality that should be commonplace. I mean, I understand why Microsoft doesn't give the ability for a PocketPC to sync with Mac, but RIM is an independent company (independent of an OS I mean) and, supposedly, forward thinkers. You would think that they would see an opportunity in an untapped market and go for it.

Obviously, the recognized the need and that's why they partnered with PocketMac, but it seems like they backed the wrong horse. Though, if you think about it, they're the only horse in the race (which is why I started this topic in the first place).

Bottom line, this sucks.

That it does! :(

I wonder if PocketMac, instead of fixing the "broken" Intel version, is working with RIM on a whole new version (from the ground up) that will be Universal?

I can only imagine that RIM had a few things to say about how the old version of PocketMac looked and functioned. ;)